Hillsborough revelations due today **SEE MOD NOTE POST #1**

Lingua Franca

http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/the-independent-panel/


Is anyone going to question the impartiality of the former police members on there, or are we only singling out the Bishop of Liverpool?


From the way people are talking here you'd think the panel was made up purely of the mothers of the deceased!

Opie

cambo2008 wrote: »

Well that's usually the way you go is it not??
I'm not questioning the outcome because it's pretty clear what went on but I was surprised at the setup of the panel to be honest.

My point there was that after being covered up for 23 years, were nobody but the people of Liverpool campaigned for justice, the make up of the panel needed to have people from the heart of the problem. They worked tirelessly to get the truth and no one can argue with that. A faceless panel with no connection might not have had the determination to deliver the "WHOLE TRUTH". The fact that people are questioning this is disgusting.

An Riabhach

Justice will NEVER be served until members of the police force,politicians,newspaper editors,emergency workers and anybody else involved in this defamation and cover-up are put behind bars.

wonderfullife

Lingua Franca wrote: »

http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/the-independent-panel/


Is anyone going to question the impartiality of the former police members on there, or are we only singling out the Bishop of Liverpool?


From the way people are talking here you'd think the panel was made up purely of the mothers of the deceased!

There are 2 things at stake here, 1 is minor, 1 is major:

1. Was the panel "independent"? (minor)

and

2. Did the panel fulfill its obligations and produce a factually correct, comprehensive report? (major)


In truth, all that really matters is number 2. So if it was the man on the moon or 8 men from the moon doing the report, if they came up with a thorough, comprehensive report then they've discharged their duty.

To play devils advocate (i'm fond of that), was the panel independent?

Rev Jones - Bishop of Liverpool and supporter of Justice campaigner
Professor Phil Scraton - Hillsborough author and Justice campaigner
Katy Jones - factual producer for Jimmy McGovern 'Hillsborough' documentary and widely praised for her work on that film.
Peter Sissons - Liverpool born/raised broadcaster

It's widely accepted that most of the leg-work on the report was performed by Prof. Scraton.

So 50% of the panel had strong Liverpool/Hillsborough ties.


For the sake of argument, if there was a panel reconvened to investigate Bloody Sunday, if half of them were from the Bogside and/or campaigning for justice for the dead, you would have to assume they would do everything to seek the facts and verdict they want to see. Or flip that argument around, if half of the panel were ex-soldiers or friends of the soldiers involved, they would try everything to seek the facts and verdict they want to see.

So, no it's not an independent panel (by any stretch of the imagination).

But the thing about facts is they remain facts, irrespective of who uncovered them. And ultimately that is all that matters here and they have done that.

Lingua Franca

I take it maths isn't your strong point.

4 of 9 people is not 50%! 5 of those people, more than half of the panel, do not have strong ties to Liverpool. Since more than 50% of the panel did not have strong ties to Liverpool, by your reckoning it is an independent panel.

Show Time

Seven days in and the OP did not correct his mistake of blaming fans inside and outside the ground.

wonderfullife

Lingua Franca wrote: »

http://hillsborough.independent.gov.uk/the-independent-panel/


Is anyone going to question the impartiality of the former police members on there, or are we only singling out the Bishop of Liverpool?


From the way people are talking here you'd think the panel was made up purely of the mothers of the deceased!

Lingua Franca wrote: »

I take it maths isn't your strong point.

4 of 9 people is not 50%! 5 of those people, more than half of the panel, do not have strong ties to Liverpool. Since more than 50% of the panel did not have strong ties to Liverpool, by your reckoning it is an independent panel.

ha ....44% so.

Being pedantic aside, maths might not be my strong point, i'm better at English though and i don't think you're getting the word 'independent'.

Take as an example The Independent Inquiry into the death of David Bennett. This was a schizophrenic black man who died in October 1998 whilst being restrained by mental health staff at a clinic in Norwich. The Independent Inquiry was set up to do 2 things - 1. examine the circumstances into his death and 2. examine the role of race/skin colour in his treatment.

Of the 5 panel members, none were black. None were from the immediate area of the incident, none had any previous ties to the family of the deceased or to the mental health clinic. They all had expertise in the right areas without any direct connection to the incident. That is what you term "independent". Whereas if you dump 2 or 3 black experts on the panel from Norwich who campaigned for the family, then that changes the complexion of it and people naturally assume they will lean towards one verdict even before the panel undertook its work.

The bottom line is this - no the Hillsborough Independent Panel were not 'independent' by any stretch of the imagination, and yes they likely had a preconceived idea of what they want their verdict to be before doing the research, but unless they could back that up with facts then they'd be screwed. They were able to back it up with facts. They just likely worked harder and searched harder to reach their conclusions. Brilliant work, yes, independent, no.